Posted on 07/07/2010 7:49:00 PM PDT by Kaslin
Law: After smearing Arizona's immigration law as racial profiling, the Justice Department has issued its lawsuit against the state. But it's not about civil rights anymore. It's about a federal "right" to not enforce U.S. law.
When Arizona passed a law last April mirroring U.S. federal immigration law, it was the opposite of the sort of challenges states historically bring to the feds.
Back when, say, schools were being desegregated, federal troops had to face off against state sheriffs because state laws were in direct contradiction to federal laws.
Not so with Arizona's law, which requires the state to help buttress federal law. That means federal and state agents should be enforcing an out-of-control illegal immigration crisis — brought on by spillover from Mexico's horrific cartel war — together.
But to the politicos now running the federal government, Arizona's law is, for political reasons, painted as racist.
"I think it certainly could invite profiling," huffed Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano last May, shortly after admitting she hadn't even read the law.
"We could potentially get on a slippery slope where people will be picked on because of how they look as opposed to what they have done," worried Attorney General Eric Holder back then.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
This is really chutzpa: soetoro sues AZ for enacting a law which he, as President, is sworn to uphold but doesn´t, which could have him impeached, but doesn´t since the criminal Congress gives him a pass on having their own prerogatives stolen.
God help us.
The federal government now has the “right” not to enforce its own laws? Then why have a congress? Why even enact laws? Jim Madison is spinning in his grave.
Can Arizona bring a counter suit for the money it has spent on illegal aliens because the federal government hasn’t enforced the immigration laws? I think that all 50 states could get into a class action suit on this. And how about bringing charges against the executive branch for not enforcing the constitutionally passed laws.
Basically they are arguing that enforcement of laws is optional. But this is exactly what Obastard believes since he told the Justice Dept to not enforce the laws against voter intimidation.
Sure ..... when black is white and day is night.
The Federal government with possibly one exception for patents held by the government does not have rights!
The federal government has duties and obligations to the citizens of the United States. Nothing more and nothing less.
Exactly, but does this not erode the very foundation of the republic? We are less and less ruled by laws, and more and more by the caprice of men.
“The federal government has duties and obligations to the citizens of the United States. Nothing more and nothing less.”
Which would include being a retirement plan and a medical care provider, naturally!/s;)
Of course. But the goal of Obastard and the liberals is to DESTROY the idea of equal rights and replace it with the idea of equal outcome, with some pigs being more equal than others.
Obama is a miserable failure.
This has nothing to do with the enforcement of immigration law. Obama knows that there is plenty of case law that gives states the right to enforce federal law, and that there’s zero chance that the Feds will win on this. And they know the racial profiling argument is BS too.
Why then did they file the suit if, as I claim, they know they will lose?
Because there’s an election coming up, and they’re behind the 8-ball. The economy and other issues have caused the level of Hispanic support for Obama to drop by about 20% since his election. But since this lawsuit was filed - it’s gone back up 3%.
This lawsuit is a political maneuver designed to elevate Obama in polls and by extension, any Democrat Congressional candidates he endorses. Obama knows the majority of the country supports the law but he only cares about regaining Hispanic voter support in time to keep Harry Reid and other influential Dems in power in 2010.
The Left would love nothing better than to have the focus taken off the economy and oil spill to discuss anything else (e.g., a lawsuit that is a political “loser”; NASA’s “new mission”). Can’t wait to see what ridiculous new “controversies” they come up with from now to November.
This seems to be a risky gambit for Obama. I wager that for every vote he wins from the hispanic population, two moderates jump off the fence away from him.
So what happens if the Feds succeed with their lawsuit? When we’re told we have no options but to bend over and enjoy the invasion?
Sounds like a plan to me. If the Federal Government continues to maintain that it doesn’t have to enforce its own laws, then logically, the citizens don’t have to abide by laws that the Federal Government passes.
I think that there is a lot more than the Hispanic support for 2010, I think that Obama is going to try to ram the illegal alien amnesty through in a lame duck session after the 2010 election, in time to get all those people registered to vote in 2012.
I wonder if he wants to give amnesty to Korean aliens, as well. We have a Korean friend who was here on a student visa while in college and has been trying to get back legally ever since.
http://www.justice.gov/opa/documents/az-complaint.pdf
This is amazing - the government’s complaint appears to be a combination of
a) We’re too busy catching terrorists
&
b) Congress assigned the DHS,DOJ and DOS the task of enforcing immigration laws, but they really don’t have to.
An interesting point might be that it seems to want to make State law subserviant not to Federal law, but to Federal policy.
Since policy can change on a whim, no State law, even those fully in agreement with Federal law, could be secure.
By the reasoning of the DOJ, local officers should not be arresting bank robbers since banks are the perview of the FBI. Also, they wouldn’t be used to fight terrorism, interstate theft etc. The DOJ really should be careful there.
Actually, the Executive Branch does indeed have that right. And the Arizona law does nothing change that.
As far as the legal aspect goes, the Feds case has no merit whatsoever. The Federal government continues to have exclusive supremacy here. The Arizona law does not usurp federal law in any way.
Serious question. There is no field preemption or conflict preemption here. What is the government’s constitutional argument?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.